Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drunks

Friday, February 1, 2013

Bills, Bills, Bills

Posted by on Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:17 AM

Remember last summer, when Senate Republicans shot down the Paycheck Fairness Act, which was supposed to increase protections for women filing employment discrimination suits? Well, Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland) just reintroduced it last week, and now this week, Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) has just gone and proposed a Fair Pay Act as well.

There are a lot of statistics demonstrating women's continued pay inequity (still just making 77 cents on that manly dollar). The landmark Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was passed in 2009, and we have an Equal Pay Act from 1963, right? If you're like me, perhaps you are thinking, "Yay! But what are these new bills, exactly? And why can't we come up with more distinct names?" (I'd go with the Fucking Pay Me, Bro, or I'll Period Everywhere Act, but whatevs.)

Therefore I am thankful that Katie J. M. Baker over at Jezebel has helpfully broken down what these bills are and how they might strengthen current fair-pay laws.

Take it away, Baker:

The Paycheck Fairness Act deals with overt cases of discrimination, where, for example, two attorneys who are equal in education, productivity, seniority, etc. are paid differently based on gender... The Fair Pay Act deals with the systematic devaluing of "women's work," like nursing, teaching, administrative work, etc., by requiring companies to disclose their pay scales for each job category, and requiring employers to provide equal pay for jobs that are comparable in skill, effort, responsibility, and working conditions...

Read the rest of Baker's breakdown.

Video after the jump.

 

Comments (4) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Theodore Gorath 1
Hell yeah, Mikulski is our liberal bulldog over here in the Senate.

Fight! Fight! Fight!

Love voting for that woman.
Posted by Theodore Gorath on February 1, 2013 at 10:13 AM · Report this
south downtown 2
would also like to see a "Living Wage" standard set in Seattle. That way we wouldn't need to subsidize as much low income (or "affordable") housing and make people live in Charles' micro-units (that he doesn't live in).
Posted by south downtown on February 1, 2013 at 10:14 AM · Report this
3
I don't have a problem with reporting pay scales, but who gets to decide when two different jobs "are comparable in skill, effort, responsibility, and working conditions"? What if those two different jobs simply dont bring as much profit to a company? Or if there's simply a lot more candidates for one than the other?

At some point you have to rely on the market to make those sorts of judgements; and given women's college graduation rates, I suspect the scales will start tipping in their favor.

And the 77 cents metric is across all job categories, all experience levels, all seniorities. In other words, it's meaningless.
Posted by madcap on February 1, 2013 at 11:04 AM · Report this
4
More like 93 to 95.2 cents on the dollar.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-…
Posted by jzimbert on February 1, 2013 at 12:12 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy